



■ 



■ 



■ 



■ 



m 



Hi 



■ ■ 






i ■ 







,o- 




*<2* 






^ v . 





^ 



** -*w w #fe ^/^life- w ••^ v 

\-^-.V /^^^°o y..^i:-X /^^% /.c- : v ;</,. 








^o, *<r. 7 » a 



"o^ 











*. % 



< * o, ^p. 








o * o <£ 










** v \ 










*of 




VV 

















< > s • ° 



^ ^ •* 



C> - o « » 



* ^ 

O *o„o' .0-' V 



"oK 



fl H<^ 














•^o* 








^ ^ 










»^°. 




^ *• • * * o- <u 




'«* c^ /, 






















<-> 




aV ^ 




,^ V % 






















V ■ -o 'o . * * A 











r > 
















'V^ 



J* \. 'X 








o . » • .0 V \5. "'TIT* ' A 





















^0^ 




^o^ 






A^ ^ ° 







*-U^ s A, 




* V V * 



*bP 




















^ 



%<• J 






<*, 











.*« 



•, **b. 










* » » » ° ^ 





./% 



4?^ 



**'^ 







a^'V 




.^ ^ J .w. ! ^ y ^ of 




Bureau off Mines Information Circular/1 987 



Domestic Secondary Lead Industry 
Production and Regulatory 
Compliance Costs 

By R. Craig Smith and Michael R. Daley 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 




/ 



Information Circular 91 56 



Domestic Secondary Lead Industry: 
Production and Regulatory 
Compliance Costs 

By R. Craig Smith and Michael R. Daley 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
Donald Paul Hodel, Secretary 

BUREAU OF MINES 
Robert C. Norton, Director 



As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior 
has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural 
resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water 
resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environment and 
cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for 
the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our 
energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is in 
the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major 
responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people 
who live in island territories under U.S. administration. __.. . 




Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data 



Smith, R. Craig. - 

Domestic secondary lead industry. 

(Information circular; 

Bibliography: p. 

Supt. of Docs, no.: I 28.27: 

1. Lead industry and trade — United States — Costs. 2. Lead — Recycling — Costs. 3. Lead 
industry and trade — Environmental aspects — United States. 4. Lead industry and 
trade — Law and legislation — United States — Compliance costs. I. Daley, Michael R. II. 
Title. III. Series: Information circular (United States. Bureau of Mines); 



-^FN295:U4 [HD9539.L42U5] 622 s [338.2'3] 87-600137 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 
Washington, D.C. 20402 



Ill 

CONTENTS 

Page Page 

Abstract 1 Operating costs 8 

Introduction 2 Variations in operating costs due to size 8 

Acknowledgments 2 Factors affecting operating costs 10 

Methodology 2 Environmental legislation and compliance costs 10 

Domestic secondary lead industry 3 Costs of compliance 11 

Secondary lead processing 4 Compliance capability 12 

Battery breaking 5 Conclusions 12 

Smelting methods 5 References 13 

Refining methods 6 Bibliography 13 

Waste disposal 7 Appendix A. — Example of capital and operating 

Sulfuric acid 8 cost estimates for environmental regulatory 

Dust, organics, slags, and drosses 8 compliance 14 



ILLUSTRATIONS 

Page 

1. Generalized secondary lead flow 3 

2. Secondary lead smelting and refining process composite _, 4 

3. Cross section of a typical blast furnace 5 

4. Cross sections of a typical stationary reverberatory furnace 6 

5. Cross section of a typical short-rotary reverberatory furnace 6 

6. Cross section of a typical refining kettle 6 

7. Operating cost estimates for present, pending, and proposed environmental regulatory compliance 11 

8. Capital cost estimates for pending and proposed environmental regulatory compliance . . . .' 12 

A-l. Original smelter facilities 14 

A-2. Additional smelter facilities for CWA 14 

A-3. Additional process emissions control equipment and ductwork for PEL 15 

A-4. Additional downcast ventilation and ductwork for PEL 15 

A-5. Original smelter process emissions control equipment, ductwork, and building enclosure 16 

A-6. Additional building enclosures for NAAQS 16 

A-7. Additional process emissions control equipment and ductwork for NAAQS 17 

A-8. Additional building enclosures for RCRA 17 



TABLES 

Page 

1. U.S. regional average price variations for scrap batteries in 1985 3 

2. Historical refined lead statistics 4 

3. Lead refining: Elements removed and reagents used 7 

4. Average operating cost estimates for smelter size ranges 9 

5. Current regulatory compliance operating costs 11 

6. Pending and proposed regulatory compliance cost estimates for secondary lead smelters 11 

A-l. CWA capital cost estimate 15 

A-2. CWA annual operating cost estimate 15 

A-3. OSHA's PEL capital cost estimate 16 

A-4. OSHA's annual operating cost estimate 16 

A-5. NAAQS capital cost estimate for the current regulation of 1.5 ptg/m 3 17 

A-6. NAAQS annual operating cost estimate for the current regulation of 1.5 M-g/m 3 1/7 

A-7. RCRA capital cost estimate 18 

A-8. RCRA annual operating cost estimate 18 



UNIT OF MEASURE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT 



A 


ampere 


km 


kilometer 


°C 


degree Celsius 


kWh 


kilowatt hour 


cm 


centimeter 


lb 


pound 


eVKWh 


cent per kilowatt hour 


m 


meter 


c/lb 


cent per pound 


mt 


metric ton 


(2/mt-km 


cent per metric ton kilometer 


mt/yr 


metric ton per year 


d/yr 


day per year 


**g 


microgram 


op 


degree Fahrenheit 


ixg/m 3 • 


microgram per cubic meter 


ft 


foot 


|xm 


micrometer 


ft 2 


square foot 


min/d 


minute per day 


ft7min 


cubic foot per minute 


Mmt 


million metric tons 


g 


gram 


pet 


percent 


ga 


gauge 


ppm 


part per million 


h 


hour 


spd 


shift per day 


h/d 


hour per day 


st 


short ton 


hp 


horsepower 


V 


volt 


in 


inch 


yr 


year 


kg 


kilogram 







DOMESTIC SECONDARY LEAD INDUSTRY: 
PRODUCTION AND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE COSTS 



By R. Craig Smith 1 and Michael R. Daley 2 



ABSTRACT 



The Bureau of Mines conducted a study of production costs for the secondary lead 
industry and determined costs for present, pending, and proposed environmental 
legislation. Operating costs for smelters by capacity groups range from 16.8 to 19.6 cTlb 
of refined lead. Present regulatory compliance costs for these groups range from 2.2 to 
2.4 tf/lb. Pending compliance costs could add 3.5 cTlb of refined lead, and proposed 
regulations could add another 1.3 cVlb. 

The individual capital costs necessary to comply with pending environmental 
regulations are estimated to be $1.8 million for small smelters and $10.4 million for 
large smelters. Proposed regulations could require additional expenditures from $1.9 
million for small smelters to $4.9 million for large smelters. 

These cost estimates, based on average 1985 dollars, indicate that pending and 
proposed legislation could add significantly to capital and operating costs of the 
secondary lead industry. These regulatory compliance costs may result in a loss of up 
to 40 pet of secondary lead production capacity. 



'Physical scientist. 
'Mineral specialist. _ 
Intermountain Field Operations Center, Bureau of Mines, Denver, CO. 



INTRODUCTION 



The purpose of this report is to assess the economics of 
producing lead by the domestic secondary lead industry 3 
and to evaluate the costs and impacts for present, pending, 
and proposed environmental regulatory compliance. Be- 
cause the industry produces approximately 50 pet of the 
refined lead in the United States, the resource of scrap 
material becomes a significant commodity, which should 
be considered in Federal minerals policy. The Bureau of 
Mines conducted this study as part of the Minerals 
Availability Program (MAP), which evaluates the avail- 
ability of commodities. The production capability and 
economic assessment of each operation is an integral part 
of this program. The scope of this study includes an 
economic assessment of the domestic secondary lead 
industry and an estimation of the costs and impacts to the 
industry from regulatory compliance. 

At the time this study was begun, in January 1986, 
there were approximately 24 operating smelters with 
production capacity greater than 3,000 mt/yr. Smelters 
with capacity less than 3,000 mt/yr were not included in 
the study because they represented less than 1 pet of total 
production capacity. 

Over the past several years, there have been many 
reports published by consulting firms on the cost and 
implications of environmental regulatory compliance 
(2 -4). 4 In general, the findings in this report support their 
cost estimates. The following are the major differences: 

1. The Bureau's capital cost estimate for compliance 
with all of the environmental regulations affecting the 



secondary lead industry is less than some industry 
estimates, but is also based on fewer operating smelters, 
due to recent closures. At the time this study was 
conducted, there were 24 operating smelters with capaci- 
ties greater than 3,000 mt/yr. 

2. Published operating cost estimates, updated to 
average 1985 dollars for comparison, indicate that the 
Bureau's cost estimate is higher by approximately 2 eflb 
refined lead. This is because the Bureau's estimate 
includes transportation charges and more regulatory 
compliance costs. 

3. The Bureau's estimate for present regulatory com- 
pliance operating costs is higher than updated published 
estimates by approximately 1.5 0lb. The difference can be 
attributed to the additional compliance presently being 
performed compared with that actually being performed 
several years ago. Assuming that this accounts for the 
higher operating cost, then the net total operating cost 
difference between previously published sources and the 
Bureau's estimate is approximately 0.5 0lb refined lead. 

4. The Bureau's estimate for proposed regulatory 
compliance costs is approximately 1 0/lb less than updated 
published estimates. 

5. The Bureau's estimate of lost production capacity 
because of shutdowns is less than half of previously 
published estimates. However, the secondary lead indus- 
try has lost aproximately 35 pet of production capacity 
since those estimates were made. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



The authors would like to thank William D. Wood- 
bury, lead commodity specialist, Bureau of Mines, 
Washington, DC, for guidance and technical assistance. In 
addition, the authors would like to thank the following 
companies: Alco Pacific Inc., Gardena, CA; Bergsoe Metal 
Corp., St. Helens, OR; Chloride Metals Inc., Tampa, FL; 
Dixie Metals Co., Dallas. TX; East Penn Manufacturing 



Co., Lyon Station, PA; GNB Inc., St. Paul, MN; General 
Battery Corp., Reading, PA; Murmur Corp., Dallas, TX; 
Ross Metals Inc., Rossville, TN; Schuylkill Metals Corp., 
Baton Rouge, LA; and Standard Industries, San Antonio, 
TX; for providing technical assistance and operating 
information. 



METHODOLOGY 



The secondary lead industry is extremely variable 
with respect to degree of integration, market conditions, 
production capacity, and products. To assess the econo- 
mics of the industry, operating costs had to be standard- 
ized to reflect only those costs associated with acquiring 
and converting scrap lead into refined metal. 5 For 

^The secondary lead industry refers to companies involved in the 
recycling of scrap lead materials by smelting and refining the lead into 
reuseable products. Presently (1986), approximately 80 pet of the scrap 
lead is in the form of spent automotive batteries. 

4 Underlined numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of 
references at the end of this report. 

5 Refined metal is considered to be antimonial lead, soft lead, oxide lead, 
and calcium lead. Other types of refined lead are actually produced but are 
an insignificant amount of production and are not considered to affect 
operating costs. 



example, some fully integrated smelter complexes pur- 
chase scrap, smelt and refine it, and use the refined lead to 
fabricate new storage batteries. The costs associated with 
making new batteries, beyond the refining stage, are not 
included in this study. The battery fabrication costs 
include labor, materials and supplies, administration, and 
a percentage of property taxes, insurance, and deprecia- 
tion. 

Procedures to obtain data for estimating operating 
costs included site visits to several smelters considered to 
be representative of the industry, industry canvassing to 
obtain specific operating details, and engineering studies 
of smelting and refining practices. Twelve companies 
responded to the canvass and supplied detailed cost data. 



These companies represented approximately 67 pet of the 
1985 domestic secondary lead production. Operating costs 
have been consolidated and averaged to conceal company- 
proprietary data. All costs are presented in average 1985 
dollars. 

For this study, initial capital costs have been 
excluded. Ongoing capital expenditures for improve- 



ments, modifications, and regulatory compliance have 
been identified, and a percentage of these costs are 
included as depreciation. The purpose of this procedure is 
to show net operating costs for current market conditions 
so that future profits or losses for environmental 
compliance expenditures can be estimated. 



DOMESTIC SECONDARY LEAD INDUSTRY 



The secondary lead industry primarily recycles new 
and old scrap. New scrap is a waste product of fabrication, 
casting plants, purchased drosses, and other residues. Old 
scrap is a product of wornout equipment and materials, 
such as batteries, cable, and type metal. Most recycled 
scrap lead is in the form of spent automotive batteries. 
Availability of lead scrap is contingent on the amount of 
prior production, durability of lead-bearing goods, and 
incentive to recycle (1). In 1984, battery scrap accounted 
for 76 pet of recycled lead (5). In the first quarter of 1986, 
an estimated 80 pet of recycled scrap was in the form of 
spent batteries. Most scrap is reprocessed into storage 
battery materials, although a variety of other commod- 
ities are produced. There are approximately 70 companies 
producing some form of secondary lead, but in 1985, 23 
companies operating 30 smelters produced 98 pet of the 
total (6). A generalized process flow is presented in figure 
1. 



Slag and 
new scrap 



c 



Old scrap 




Slag 



> 



Smelling turnaces 



^ __ f Smelting \ 

reagents J 



c 



<* 



Specialty alloy 




Market Market Market Market 

Figure 1 . — Generalized secondary lead flow. 



Most secondary lead smelters have contracts with 
battery producers, other secondary smelters, and indepen- 
dent manufacturers. Secondary smelters, especially the 
large-capacity plants, have long-term contracts with 
battery producers. This is the most economical arrange- 
ment because these smelters supply lead to the battery 
producers and then back-haul spent batteries. However, 
this arrangement does not necessarily supply the majority 
of scrap lead, resulting in a competitive scrap lead 
recycling industry. Transportation distances up to 1,600 
km are not uncommon, and scrap prices vary by region. 
The primary reason for scrap price variations is demand. 
The Northeast has competition with Canada and Brazil 
for scrap, and the west coast has competition with Asia, 
Brazil, and Mexico. The South currently has the least 
competition and the lowest price for scrap (table 1). 
Exports have been increasing to southeast Asia and 
Mexico for the last several years and have made the entire 
west coast a very competitive market (6-7). Foreign 
smelters can afford to bid a higher price for scrap because 
their capital, labor, and environmental costs are lower 
than U.S. producers. This puts west coast smelters in a 
low profitability position because of the high price of 
scrap. 

TABLE 1.— U.S. Regional average price variations for scrap 
batteries in 1985, cents per pound 



Area 

West 

Northeast 
South .... 



Whole 
batteries 



Lead 
content 



3.85 
3.00 
2.65 



8.0 
6.2 
5.5 



Production capacity in 1981 was estimated to be 1.2 
Mmt, but because of oversupply, weak demand, high 
prices for scrap, and environmental regulatory costs, 
several smelters have been shut down and dismantled. 
This represents a permanent loss of production capacity. 
Domestic installed production capacity is now estimated 
to be 900,000 mt. In 1985, due to permanent and 
temporary smelter closures, operating companies had a 
combined capacity of 800,000 mt, of which approximately 
600,000 mt of refined lead was produced. More closures 
and resultant loss of capacity can be expected if current 
market conditions and proposed environmental regula- 
tions go into effect. In 1984 and 1985, battery scrap as a 
percentage of recycled secondary lead has been increasing 
(table 2). Secondary lead production has also increased as 
a percentage of total lead production. Strikes at the 
domestic lead mines in 1984 and low primary production, 
because of poor economic forecasts for 1985, were the main 
reasons for the increases (6). Capacity utilization for 
operating secondary smelters was 75 pet for 1984 and 
1985, and worse in the preceding years due to significant 
overcapacity. 



TABLE 2.— Historical refined lead statistics, thousands of 
metric tons of contained lead 

Production 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 

Domestic ores 440.2 459.9 459.3 330.2 416.1 

Foreign ores 55.1 52.3 55.2 65.4 71 .4 

Secondary lead, new and old scrap 641.1 571.3 503.5 633.4 594.2 

Batteries, pet of secondary lead 75 77 74 77 78 

Secondary lead, pet of total refined lead 56 53 49 62 55 

Source: Woodbury (2). 



The average 1985 price for refined lead was 19.2 eVlb. 
This represents a 25 pet decrease from 1984 and the lowest 
price this century in terms of constant 1985 dollars (8). 
The average price of refined lead for the first quarter of 
1986 was 18.4 <z/lb. 



SECONDARY LEAD PROCESSING 



The smelting and refining technologies employed in 
the secondary lead industry are significantly different 
from those used in the primary lead industry. The reasons 
are the high lead content of the feed, the absence of 
complex impurities, the preparation of scrap lead feed, 
and the types of products produced. The secondary lead 



process flow includes battery breaking, smelting by either 
blast furnace or reverberatory furnace or both, and 
refining. A generalized process flow diagram presenting 
the most commonly used methods of smelting, refining, 
and product output is presented in figure 2. 



LEAD 
SUPPLY 



C Slaga ) ( Scr»o ) ( Droaaaa j (Battary «ida) (Battary platea) ^Ba tt arias} 



I 

f High PB 



SMELTING 
FURNACES 



REFINING 
KETTLES 



& 



r 



rM 



High Pb dug 



Battery omds 



Rsverberatory 
furnace 
(rotary) 



cx 



Natural gas 



SjllMouj limestone 



^ 



Breaker 

and 
wathw 



Battery metal 



Reverberatory 

furnace 

(stationary) 



°2 



HjSO, 



Plastic 



Binary 
oxida 



U 



Blaat firnac* 



Hijfi Sb 



High 
Pb 



1-J-- 



-^^--- 



p-'J 



Sjllcgoug llmgatong 



I Natural gas 
or hjal oil 



f^nerburner) 



i I J 

| [ Pitch or t 
• I sawdust | 



-H 



Cu I 



; 



XJ 



lU- 



CASTING, 

PACKAQINQ, 

WASTE DISPOSAL 



Jf! »ESr» i 

I Air , .. . 5 ■- 

1 ' ; 3~± 



Harris procass 
w/sodium rMtrate 



-:;-! 



High PB dual 



I High 
ICu 



I Pb 



Laad 
oxida 



■-H 



Ca 
laad 



IT 



Casting machines 



• Pitch or 

1 sawdust 

• I or sulfur 

i t I 



Sb laad 



\.J 



Harris procass 



Aa-Sn| 



I- 



Ca 

laad 



Baghouse 



High 

Cd-CI 

dust 



Limastons 
or lima or 
soda ash 



(Acid neutralization) 



Wet scrubber 
(lime solutions) 



Cu refiner Waste dump Market 



|Sb 
ilead 



Market Cd-CI As-Sn 
refiners refiners 



Clean 
gases 



Gypsum 

or 

Na 2 S0 4 



KEY 
Ami mo ni a' lead 
Sort lead 
Slag (Ca-Fe-Sl) 
• Fume 
Dross 



Figure 2.— Secondary lead smelting and refining process composite. 



BATTERY BREAKING 

Battery breaking is the first step in the lead recycling 
process. Because lead-acid batteries are considered to be 
hazardous material for processors, it has become standard 
practice to break batteries as soon as possible after 
delivery. This usually means unloading from trucks 
directly into the breaker. Most breakers are either the 
hammer mill or the saw-type breaker. The hammer mill is 
fed whole batteries. After the batteries are broken, the 
acid drains into a collection facility and the solids proceed 
to the flotation section. The saw-type breaker cuts the tops 
off the batteries, allowing the acid to drain. The batteries 
are then either manually emptied of plates and sludge and 
fed into a hammer mill, or used as direct feed into a 
reverberatory furnace. 

If the batteries are manually emptied, the plates and 
sludge must be washed to remove all vestiges of acid. The 
tops of the batteries must be processed through a hammer 
mill to separate the posts and plate tops from the plastic 
and rubber. For the batteries not emptied manually, the 
entire battery, less acid, is fed to a rotary hammer mill for 
component separation and washing. Operations with 
direct-feed hammer-mill breakers are realizing consider- 
able labor savings as a result of the smaller work force 
necessary for operation and maintenance. This results 
from the fact that the batteries feed directly to the mill 
from a conveyor and do not require constant monitoring 
and adjustment. 

The flotation section separates the battery-casing 
plastic, rubber, and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) from the 
plates, posts, and sludge. Washing is also accomplished in 
this section. The plastic is recycled because it has a 16- to 
18-eVlb value (1985 prices) and each battery averages 1.5 
lb of plastic. Rubber and PVC are generally discarded in 
hazardous waste dump sites. Plates, posts, and sludge 
(lead oxide and lead sulfate) are stored in open-faced 
concrete bins. Most of these storage bins are totally 
enclosed in buildings or are being converted to enclosed 
buildings because regulations require all materials with a 
lead content greater than 1 pet to be stored in such a 
manner. 

SMELTING METHODS 

Smelting is a pyrometallurgical method for the 
separation of metal from impurities. There are three basic 
operations involved in smelting: (1) initial burnout of the 
charge, which incinerates combustibles; (2) sweating the 
charge, which releases the metallics because of their low 
melting point; and (3) slagging the charge, which forms a 
molten lead layer and a layer of oxidized impurities. 
Smelting can be accomplished in a blast furnace, a 
stationary reverberatory furnace, or a rotary reverbera- 
tory furnace. Electric arc furnace technology is being 
tested or utilized, but is not included in this study. Many 
smelters utilize a blast and reverberatory combination, 
but rotary furnaces are generally used alone because of 
their versatility. 

Blast furnaces are operated as large-scale batch 
smelters. This allows for greater utility because the 
charge can be adjusted to the base metal assay for each 
batch. Batch operations also allow for more variable feed 
stocks, such as high-lead drosses, high-lead slags, flue 
dust, scrap lead, and any combination of the above. Blast 
furnaces are top loaded and have a crucible at the bottom 



(fig. 3). These furnaces range in size from 68 to 120 cm in 
diameter with a working height of 2.4 to 3 m. Crucible 
location prevents further reaction of the molten lead 
because of the overlying slag layer. Tuyeres extend 
through the water jacketed shaft above the hearth and 
supply air and oxygen for combustion. The blast furnace 
can simultaneously burnout and sweat the charge, 
thereby reducing fuel and time requirements. Coke is the 
standard fuel and makes up approximately 10 pet of the 
charge. 



Charge 




Charge hopper 
Cone 



Offtake to 
downcomer 



Average level of charge 



5 o 



O CM 



Water jacket 



Diameter 
at tuyeres 
68 lo 120 c 



Hot water •» 



Lead spout 



Lead well 
and siphon 



Tuyere 



Slag spout 



Drain tap 



Figure 3.— Cross section of a typical blast furnace. (Modified 
from Murph (9)) 

As a charge is heated, the pure metal portion melts 
first, which leaves the flux (iron, silica, and lime) and the 
metallic oxides to be converted into slag. The molten lead 
accumulates at the bottom of the furnace and is tapped 
through the use of a weir-dam siphon. With the 
metallurgical reduction order being lead, then antimony, 
then tin, the charge balance of coke must be adequate to 
carry reductions at least through the antimonial stage. 

The stationary reverberatory furnace is essentially a 
melting furnace. It is rectangular in shape and has a 
shallow hearth and an arched roof. The floor and roof both 
slope downward, roughly parallel, toward the firing end of 
the furnace. The other end of the furnace has a large 
hopper for continuous feed of the charge, generally 
through the roof (fig. 4). The dimensions are quite 
variable, with widths from 1 to 6 m, lengths from 1.8 to 12 
m, and heights from 1 to 3 m. The furnace is ideally suited 
for smelting of homogeneous material, whereas heter- 
ogeneous material in a continuous feed system can 
develop problems in maintaining a balanced flux charge. 
The charge is melted by a flame, which extends half the 
length of the furnace. As the charge melts, it flows down 
into the molten pool on the hearth. The slag is tapped 
continuously while the lead is tapped periodically. 



Arch 




Hygiene hood 



Hygiene hood> 



Refractory 
lining 



Side 
tapping 



^7 
Combustion 
air fans 

Figure 4.— Cross sections of a typical stationary reverbera- 
tory furnace. (Courtesy Tolltreck International Ltd.) A) Interior, 
exhaust end and B) Exterior, combustion end. 

Because the throughput rate of a stationary rever- 
beratory furnace is relatively slower than the rate of a 
blast furnace, refining within the reverberatory furnace is 
possible. In particular, high lead-content drosses may be 
formed and recovered, as well as slags with high lead and 
antimony content. These materials may be returned to the 
blast furnace for further lead recovery. 

The rotary reverberatory furnace has some similar- 
ities with both the stationary reverberatory and the blast 
furnace. The rotary, like a blast, may handle a wider 
variety of feed materials because most charges are 
handled in batches. This allows the flux component to be 
adjusted to the specific assay of the material to be reduced. 
Like the stationary reverberatory furnace, it has an 
external fuel source so that after the reduction reaction 
has been carried out, it may retain the melt for drossing. 
The primary advantage of this system is the thorough 
mixing action, which optimizes the reduction recovery and 
rate. The mixing action also allows optimum reaction time 
for drossing. 

Rotary reverberatory furnaces have a relatively 
simple design. They are barrel shaped, from 1.8 to 4.5 m in 
diameter, and 2.5 to 6.8 m long, with gas jets fixed in a 
stationary plate at one end and an attached charging door 
at the other end (fig. 5). One of the primary problem areas 
for rotaries in the United States has been a premature 
failure of the refractory linings within the furnace barrel. 




Burner 



Drive train 



Figure 5. — Cross section of a typical short-rotary reverbera- 
tory furnace. (Courtesy Tolltreck International Ltd.) 

These problems have been gradually remedied over the 
past few years, and now rotaries are being received more 
favorably in the United States. The rotary design is a 
compromise between the operating flexibility of the blast 
furnace for smelting and the refining capability of the 
stationary reverberatory furnace. 

REFINING METHODS 

Refining is the final step in the chemical purification 
process of secondary lead recycling. It is accomplished in 
open-topped containers, called refining kettles, that are 
usually semispherical in shape and are constructed of cast 
iron or steel. Kettles range in depth from 1 to 2.2 m, with 
capacities of 25 st or more. All are heated from below, with 
the kettle seated in a specially constructed, refractory- 
lined, steel-sheathed furnace (fig. 6). Melt agitation is 
accomplished by mechanical impellers or by specially 
designed air jets, which impart a stirring motion. 



Mixer drive 



Fume hood 




Figure 6.— Cross section of a typical refining kettle. (Cour- 
tesy Tolltreck International Ltd.) 



The refining process upgrades lead bullion to soft lead 
(pure lead) or alloys. It is in this stage that reaction rates, 
and selective reactivity, become critical. If a particular 
reagent is added at the wrong time, a potentially toxic 
substance may be formed or a beneficial metal may be 
prematurely removed. In some cases, a potentially 
valuable byproduct may even be lost in the process and 
require additional processing to recover it. Table 3 is a 
summarized listing of the alloy metals that may need 
removal and some of the reagents commonly used for that 
purpose. 

TABLE 3. — Lead refining: Elements removed and reagents 
used 



Element 
removed 



Principle 
used 



Temp, 1 
°C 



Basic 
reagent 



Other alloying 
elements affected 



Ag Intermetallic . . . 675 

As do 675 

..do 675 

Oxidation 620 

. .do 455 

Bi Intermetallic . . . 675 

Cu do 675 

Limited 400 
solubility. 

Chemical 330 

. .do 330 

Fe Intermetallic . . . 675 

Chemical 400 

Limited 400 
solubility. 

Ni do 400 



Sb 



Sn 



Zn 



Chemical 330 

. Intermetallic . . . 675 
Oxidation 620 



.do. 

. .do . . . . 

. .do . . . . 
...do.... 

..do... 

..do.... 

..do.... 
. Limited 

solubility. 

..do.... 

. .do . . . . 



Fine solids do 

..do 



620 
565 
425 
620 
620 
480 
425 
600 

400 
400 

400 
400 



Zn None. 

Al Sb.Cu. 

Zn None. 

Air Sb, Sn. 

K 2 C0 3 Sn. 

Ca, Mg None. 

Al As, Sb. 

Pitch or Ni, Fe, Zn. 

sawdust. 

S Sn. 

NaOH with S .. .. .. 2 Sn. 

Al None. 

S Cu, Sb, Ni. 

Pitch or Cu, Ni, Zn. 

sawdust. 
Pitch or Cu, Fe, Zn. 

sawdust. 

S Cu, Sn. 

Al As, Cu. 

Pb 3 4 Sn. 

Air Sn, As. 

NaOH, NaN0 3 Sn. 

NaOH, NaN0 3 Sn. 

Pb 3 4 None. 

Air Sb, As. 

NaOH, NaN0 3 As, Sb. 

NaOH, NaN0 3 None. 

Vacuum None. 

distillation. 
NH4CI with NaOH.. None. 
Pitch or Cu, Ni, Fe. 

sawdust. 

Steam Finely divided 

Natural Gas metallic solids. 



1 All temperatures are at or near upper range for the particular reactions 
listed. 

2 Sn interferes with the chemical reaction promoted by the NaOH, 
therefore, this reaction cannot be used when Sn is present in the melt. 

Source: Modified from Hudson (10). 

Antimonial lead is the most common product of 
secondary lead operations, primarily because most pro- 
duction is derived from, and recycled into, lead-acid 
batteries. The initial step in the refining process is to 
decopperize the melt. If the sulfur method is to be used, 
the lead temperature is dropped from the smelting 
temperature to around 320° to 330° C and then elemental 
sulfur is mixed into the kettle. For the dry drossing 
method, the temperature is held at 400° C and pitch or 
sawdust is used instead of sulfur. These processes produce 
a copper sulfide dross, which can then be returned to the 
smelting furnace for lead recovery. 

The softening process normally used to remove 
arsenic and tin is the bubbled air method. With the melt 



at a temperature of 620° C, air is bubbled through the 
molten lead, and the dry dross is skimmed off. Some 
operations will use sodium hydroxide to form sodium 
stannates and arsenates in a dross. If a fully softened lead 
is needed (lead which contains no antimony, arsenic, or 
tin) then sodium nitrate (niter) can be used in conjunction 
with air. The niter speeds up the oxidation rate and acts as 
a catalyst so that all three impurities are removed at the 
same time. For those operations where the feed stock 
contains no arsenic, aluminum may be used to remove 
copper, antimony, and nickel. This procedure will remove 
copper and nickel to acceptable levels. 

If the melt has appreciable zinc values that must be 
removed, then the sulfur method will be used to remove 
the copper. The pitch-sawdust method removes copper and 
zinc at the same time and produces a combined copper-zinc 
dross that is not as readily marketable as either copper or 
zinc drosses. Zinc is considered to be a very detrimental 
alloying agent in lead products. For those operations that 
treat scrap with appreciably large zinc assays, a vacuum 
distilled zinc process is generally used. This is accom- 
plished by heating the melt to 600° C in a kettle with a 
specially fitted vacuum hood, which maintains a very low 
vacuum pressure to boil off the zinc. The hood has its own 
cooling system, which causes the zinc to condense and 
crystallize on the inside of the hood. This method requires 
no further processing to produce a marketable zinc 
byproduct. 

When producing calcium alloys, the calcium is added 
to a mixed kettle of softened lead. Calcium is added in its 
metallic form or as a reactive carbide. Because of the 
susceptibility of the calcium to oxidation during this 
process, it is normal to have a layer of nonreactive 
material on the surface of the melt. 

Lead oxide is made from softened lead or primary 
lead, commonly by the Barton process. Lead is melted in a 
melting pot, continuously fed into a Barton pot (reactor), 
and atomized. The atomization process involves rotating 
mixer blades just at the molten lead surface, which 
produces particles of Pb of 5 u-m or less. As the lead is 
oxidized to PbO, it is entrained in the air stream and 
conveyed to the air pollution control system. Approx- 
imately 60 pet of the product is recovered in the settling 
chamber and 15 to 20 pet in the cyclone. The remaining 
product is collected in the baghouse. The product is then 
augered to storage bins or to a hammer mill. The hammer 
mill is primarily used to insure a uniform product and to 
meet specifications. 

After refining and alloying, the metal is pumped to 
casting machines. The final cast form can range in weight 
from special-order 20-lb bars to 2,000-lb blocks. Forms 
may be rounds, bars, ingots, pigs, hogs, billets, or any of a 
number of different speciality shapes. Standard practice is 
to cast 65-lb ingots or 2000-lb hogs. The ingot casting 
chain is water cooled and usually requires personnel for 
skimming off the oxidized layer. For small custom 
operations, ingot casting may be done by hand with 
long-handled lead dippers used to pour the lead into 
single, twin, or five-cavity molds. 



WASTE DISPOSAL 



Because of the hazardous nature of the materials 
being handled at secondary lead operations, special 



precautions are necessary to prevent air, water, and land 
contamination. Waste disposal is therefore an important 



aspect of secondary lead recycling. The primary waste 
products are sulfuric acid, dust, organics, slags, and 
drosses. These wastes are either neutralized, recycled, or 
transported to hazardous waste-dump sites. 



SULFURIC ACID 

Acid neutralization is the most involved and costly 
aspect of waste disposal. Presently, there are three 
chemical processes being employed within the industry: 
lime neutralization, soda ash neutralization, and anhy- 
drous ammonia neutralization. The Environmental Pro- 
tection Agency (EPA) has determined that the lime 
neutralization method is the best available technology 
(BAT), and compliance with this standard is scheduled for 
March 1987. Lime neutralization involves mixing lime 
with acid, resulting in the formation of gypsum and water. 
The gypsum is placed in settling bins or is filtered to 
reduce the moisture content. It is then transported to 
hazardous waste dumps because it generally exceeds the 
EPA limit of 5.0 ppm lead or the variable state limits. This 
method of acid neutralization produces large quantities of 
gypsum. An average recycled battery produces about 0.6 
kg of dry-weight gypsum. Disposal, therefore, becomes a 
very expensive operating cost item. 

Neutralization with soda ash is a more expensive 
neutralization and monitoring process, but there are no 
waste product transportation costs. This process mixes the 
soda ash with the acid to form a weak sodium sulfate 
solution. Filtration and pH adjustment are required to 
keep lead levels at a minimum, and then the solution is 
pumped into the sewer system. The solution is generally 
alkaline (pH 7-10), which actually helps the water 
treatment plants because they can have serious problems 
with acidic solutions. This neutralization process is not as 
effective as the lime neutralization process for removing 
lead and also produces a large amount of dissolved solids 
in the waste stream. 

The ammonia neutralization process produces ammo- 
nium sulfate, which is water soluble, nontoxic, and 
biodegradable. If the waste stream is low in metals (lead, 
arsenic, antimony, selenium, and cadmium), then ammo- 



nium sulfate crystals can be produced for use as a 
fertilizer. The process also allows for pumping the solution 
into the sewer system, but most sanitation departments do 
not permit it because of the high biological oxygen 
demand (BOD) and the large amount of dissolved solids. 
This neutralization process is not considered to be BAT 
because the Clean Water Act (CWA) classifies ammonia 
compounds as "nonconventional pollutants." The regula- 
tion requires that 90 pet of nonconventional pollutants be 
removed from waste water discharges. Because of the 
regulation, this acid neutralization process is no longer 
considered to be a viable alternative. 

DUST, ORGANICS, SLAGS, AND DROSSES 

Dust, organics, slags, and drosses are additional 
waste products from lead processing. Several smelting and 
refining stages produce significant quantities of offgases, 
which contain lead particulates. To meet emission 
standards, it is common practice to use baghouses to filter 
the lead particulates from the offgas. Baghouse dusts are 
recycled as furnace feed until other elemental accumula- 
tions, primarily cadmium and chlorine, reach assay levels 
requiring other methods of processing. When this occurs, 
the dust is usually sold to smelters that can process the 
material. 

Disposal of the organics (rubber, PVC, and battery- 
casing plastic) is handled in several ways. Some opera- 
tions burn the rubber, plastic, and PVC in the smelting 
furnace and realize some energy savings. The most 
common method is to dispose of the rubber and PVC in 
hazardous waste dumps, and sell the plastic to battery- 
casing manufacturers. 

Almost all slag is disposed of in hazardous waste 
dumps because it cannot meet structural integrity tests, 
or the leachable lead content is too high. Slags are usually 
hauled by contractors to State-approved disposal sites. 

Drosses are reprocessed onsite to reduce the lead 
content until the impurity metals reach a level that 
cannot be handled by the smelter. The drosses are then 
sold to other smelters that can process the material. 
Copper drosses and arsenic-tin drosses are the most 
common drosses produced. 



OPERATING COSTS 



To evaluate smelters on a common basis, all dollar 
values were adjusted to average 1985 dollars, and only 
those costs associated with producing refined metal were 
considered. For example, a fully integrated smelter 
complex with an end product of packaged batteries would 
be evaluated only from battery breaking through refining. 
All additional costs for labor, utilities, materials, supplies, 
maintenance, and overhead associated with battery 
production are excluded. Cost items such as property 
taxes, insurance, and some general office charges are 
proportionally allocated. 

The operating costs have been separated into conver- 
sion costs, lead supply costs, and miscellaneous costs for 
clarity and comparison. Conversion costs represent the 
cost of converting scrap lead into refined lead and lead 
alloys. Included in these costs are materials and utilities, 
maintenance, general services, labor, administration, 
environmental, property taxes, and insurance. Lead 



supply costs represent the cost of purchasing delivered 
scrap lead. Miscellaneous costs represent cost items that 
affect individual operating economics, such as credits, 
transportation, and depreciation. 



VARIATIONS IN OPERATING COSTS DUE TO 
SIZE 

Table 4 presents the operating cost breakdowns for 
smelters grouped into size ranges. Grouping by size serves 
the purpose of disguising individual company-proprietary 
data and shows relative economies of scale for the size 
ranges. The table shows an economy of scale for the 
medium size range smelters over the smaller smelters, but 
a diseconomy between medium and large smelters. This 
diseconomy is primarily a result of under utilization of 
capacity for the large smelters. If the large smelters were 



805,020 


1 ,704,360 


3,847,470 


109,960 
75,140 
42,340 


139,970 
185,650 
184,560 


542,160 
285,300 
176,580 


227,440 


510,180 


1,004,040 



TABLE 4. — Average operating cost estimates for smelter size 
ranges, average 1985 dollars 

Capacity mt/yr. . 1 5,000-15,000 2 1 5,000-40,000 3 40,000-85,00o" 

ANNUAL COSTS 

Materials and utilities: 

Electricity 124,570 215,540 587,800 

Natural gas 140,310 326,530 955,360 

Fuel 11,620 18,820 67,500 

Coke 165,470 450,510 456,880 

Scrap iron 30,130 130,860 190,300 

Limestone 9,060 7,210 8,040 

Arsenic 23,500 27,200 81,320 

Antimony 83,130 123,600 468,840 

Tin 81,330 44,980 100,090 

Calcium 8,790 

Selenium 1,130 10,800 

Oxygen 28,200 128,910 76,830 

Zinc-aluminum 5,480 

Hydrated lime 400 11,580 69,560 

Caustic soda 28,570 20,200 31,800 

Caustic potash 500 4,470 2,660 

Sodaash 12,410 2,500 397,630 

Miscellaneous materials 64,690 177,180 342,060 

Subtotal 

Maintenance materials: 

Repair parts, mechanical 

Repair parts, consumable ... 
Purchased and rental service 

Subtotal 

Labor: 

Production labor 329,160 687,830 1,197,290 

Supervision 80,170 190,350 285,740 

Maintenance labor 55,300 118,680 347,160 

Supervision 65,730 45,840 78,070 

Administrative 91,430 338,990 638,280 

Payroll overhead 176,130 522,800 811,360 

Subtotal 797,920 1,904,490 3,357,900 

Indirect costs: 

General office 70,510 313,320 299,210 

Environmental (partial) 108,280 553,360 1,158,900 

Property taxes 4,350 86,140 146,590 

Insurance 43,470 74,570 41,540 

Subtotal 226,610 1,027,390 1,646,240 

Scrap lead supply: 

Batteries 552,130 2,395,030 5,077,820 

Primary lead 184,960 616,660 

Scrap and dross 195,270 213,770 445,990 

Subtotal 932,360 2,608,800 6,140,470 

MiscsllsnGous' 

Recycled plastic credit -107,120 -263,300 -616,790 

Transportation 320,190 378,320 983,040 

Depreciation 4 -5,850 -192,620 -520,310 

Subtotal 207,220 -77,600 -154,060 

Net operating cost 5 3,196,570 7,677,620 15,842,060 

COST PER POUND REFINED LEAD 

Materials and utilities 0.049 0.037 0.043 

Maintenance materials 014 .01 1 .01 1 

Labor 049 .042 .037 

Indirect costs 014 .022 .018 

Scrap lead supply .057 .057 .068 

Miscellaneous .013 -.002 -.002 

Total 196 .168 .176 

1 Average 1985 production is 7,384 mt refined lead. 

2 Average 1985 production is 20,751 mt refined lead. 

3 Average 1985 production is 40,869 mt refined lead. 

4 Depreciation is a percentage of 1985 identified capital expenditures and 
estimates of past capital expenditures based on the ACRS. 

5 Data may not add to total shown because of independent rounding. 



operating near capacity, then the economy of scale would 
be consistent through the size ranges. 

In 1985, the larger smelters' average production was 
approximately 64 pet of capacity, whereas the medium 
size smelters were utilizing 91 pet of capacity. Economy of 
scale is consistent for production and maintenance labor 
throughout the size ranges because the labor force can be 
scheduled according to production requirements. Regula- 
tory compliance costs indicate a reverse economy of scale 
for the smaller smelters for several reasons: they are 



generally compact and require less capital for enclosure 
and retrofit, they are more capable of varying furnace 
operations for particulates emissions compliance, and 
they have been generally less regulated than the larger 
smelter complexes. 

The amount of depreciation varies from smelter to 
smelter. In general, most of the small smelters and many 
of the medium size smelters were built in the 1940's and 
1950's and are essentially depreciated, although many 
have rebuilt or replaced furnaces. Depreciable costs for 
these smelters are' primarily attributable to capital 
expenditures for environmental compliance. Several of 
the medium and larger smelters are newer and, therefore, 
have a larger depreciation value for capital costs, but a 
smaller amount of depreciable environmental compliance 
costs. This is primarily because of better control technolo- 
gy incorporated within these newer smelters. 

In an attempt to account for after-tax economics, 
individual smelters were evaluated for recent capital 
expenditures for regulatory compliance and original 
capital cost recapture. Capital costs for regulatory 
compliance were depreciated based on the Accelerated 
Cost Recovery System (ACRS). This schedule, based on 
1985 tax laws, is anticipated to be the most advantageous 
tax schedule, which may come close to actual company 
accounting practices. As a common basis of depreciation, 
the second year rate of 22 pet was used for identified 
capital expenditures. Smelter capital costs are depreciated 
over a 30-yr period or 3.33 pet per year. These depreciable 
items are included in the operating costs for comparison 
purposes. 

There are several cost items that are relatively 
inflexible to scale. The most significant conversion cost 
items are electricity, natural gas, coke, and antimony. 
These supplies are basic to the conversion of scrap lead 
into refined lead and lead alloys. Battery supply is a 
significant cost item and is probably the single most 
important item for determining refined lead profitability. 
In general, smelting practices have probably reached 
optimum efficiency, thereby reducing conversion costs to a 
minimum; therefore, the margin between conversion costs 
plus lead supply costs and the sale price of refined lead 
determines profitability. 

In 1985, the "ask" price for soft lead was 19.0 to 19.5 
eTlb. The "bid" price was probably closer to 18.5 0/lb. The 
1985 average contract price for soft lead was approximate- 
ly 19.2 e71b (8). If the secondaries all produced soft lead as 
their only product, then the net profitabilities would be 
very low, and some smelters would have a negative cash 
flow. However, this is not the case because the secondary 
lead smelters products incorporate a "value-added," which 
commands a higher price. Value-added represents the 
additional value to a product for further refinement, metal 
alloying, or casting. The smelter operating costs presented 
in table 4 exclude the processing costs for value-added, and 
do not reflect the actual sale price or value of the products. 
The value of products sold has not been included because 
of the variability of products produced from each smelter, 
the degree of integration for each, and individual company 
contract prices. 

For example, the smaller smelters generally produce 
products according to customer orders or internal de- 
mands. Customer orders may vary from special alloys to 
sailing vessel keels. The value-added is incorporated in 
the form of additional refining and metal content to 
fabrication of keels. Therefore, the sale of these products 
will include a profit margin for additional metal content or 



10 



fabrication. The bottom line would show a profit on 
production, but not per pound of refined lead. Degree of 
integration has essentially the same effect. A plant that 
converts scrap lead into marketable batteries has passed 
the profit along to the final product. The profit is, 
therefore, in terms of profit per battery and not profit or 
loss per pound of lead produced. 



FACTORS AFFECTING OPERATING COSTS 

Within the secondary lead industry, each smelter has 
some relative operating advantages and disadvantages. 
Size and age of the smelter are important factors because 
economies of scale do exist and some fully depreciated 
smelters are more economical, on an after tax basis, than 
partially depreciated smelters. Degree of integration and 
product diversity also have distinct advantages. Most of the 
smaller smelters cater to orders for small lots of various 
products and are able to include an added value to these 
products. The smaller smelters also show a greater degree 
of integration, some through battery marketing. This 
allows for the largest amount of added value to the 



product. Smelter location is probably the most important 
factor affecting direct operating costs. Regional variations 
in prices for electricity, natural gas, scrap lead, coke, and 
labor significantly affect operating costs. Proximity to 
suppliers and consumers affects transportation costs. 
Truck transportation rates vary from 9.2 e7mt-km for local 
hauls up to 100 km, to 3.1 0/mt-km for long hauls. An 
increasingly significant cost factor is environmental cost. 
State and local regulations are quite variable. States such 
as California and Oregon are very strict and compliance is 
very costly, whereas most southern States are less strict. 
Local governments can even shut down smelters if actions 
are contrary to city planning and administration policies. 
Waste disposal is also becoming a very significant expense 
and is often a difficult task to perform. For example, 
smelters are required to test slag to see if it is classified as 
"hazardous." If tests indicate the material is hazardous, 
then special hazardous waste dumps must be used. There 
are very few dumps that can accept hazardous waste and, 
in some cases, they may be hundreds of kilometers from 
the smelters. California charges $29.76/mt of hazardous 
waste as an additional tax. The total cost for testing, 
hauling, and dumping these wastes can be as high as 
$105/mt. 



ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION AND COMPLIANCE COSTS 



Over the past two decades, the EPA nas been charged 
by Congress to enforce numerous laws intended to protect 
the environment, to reduce the amount of pollutants 
introduced into the environment, and to clean up the 
environment. All of these laws have impacted the 
secondary lead industry to varying extent. The Clean Air 
Act (CAA) and National Ambient Air Quality Standard 
(NAAQS) have resulted in lower lead emissions released 
into the atmosphere and lower exposure levels of lead for 
the industry labor force. The CWA and Solid Waste 
Disposal Act (SWDA) have insured monitoring of ground 
water for possible contamination around lead processing 
facilities and proper handling and disposal of hazardous 
wastes. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
(RCRA), SWDA, and Hazardous and Solid Waste Amend- 
ments Act have helped to insure public health and 
decrease environmental degradation by setting disposal 
and monitoring standards for solid and hazardous wastes. 
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensa- 
tion, and Liability Act "Superfund" levies a tax of 
$4.56/mt of lead oxide produced to generate funds to 
clean up polluted waste disposal sites. In addition, several 
Superfund reauthorization bills introduced in Congress 
propose a tax on all lead but, at the time of this report, the 
legislation has not been passed. The NAAQS is also being 
reviewed for possible reduction to 1.0 or 0.5 p-g/m 3 of lead 
in ambient air at fenceline. The most important Federal 
regulations affecting the secondary lead industry are: 

1. The EPA's CWA of 1977, as amended. This governs 
effluent limits based on type of smelter production or 
consumption of metal and the BAT, and became effective 
July 1, 1984. For current operations already indirectly 
discharging through publicly owned water treatment 
facilities, BAT pretreatment standards must be complied 
with by March 1987. 

2. The Occupational Safety and Health Administra- 
tion's (OSHA) inplant maximum permissible exposure 
limit (PEL) standard of 50 jxg/m 3 of lead in air. Final 



compliance plans must have been filed by August 1, 1984, 
with full implementation of the plans completed by June 
29, 1986. An interim standard PEL of 100 \x.g was allowed 
during the interval between these two dates. Variable 
combinations of engineering controls, administrative 
controls, and worker self-protection were allowed during 
the interim period and in the final compliance plan, but 
plans were negotiated on a plant-by-plant basis with 
OSHA and, where applicable, with the union. This 
negotiation process, known as Cooperative Assessment 
Program (CAP), has been made available to all lead 
processors. The program allows for greater flexibility by 
mutually agreed plans for compliance. 

3. Public Law (PL) 98-616, the Hazardous and Solid 
Waste Amendments Act, enacted November 8, 1984, 
amending the SWDA of 1965 and its amendments, the 
RCRA of 1976, and the SWDA amendments of 1980. This 
law classifies as hazardous waste all effluents that have 
lead or lead compound concentrations of 500 ppm or 
greater with a pH of less than or equal to 2.0. 

4. The OSHA's 1979 blood-lead standard. The final 
phase of that regulation became effective on March 1, 
1983, with full implementation of the maximum allowable 
blood concentration of 50 |xg of lead per 100 g of blood. At 
or above that level, an employee must be immediately 
removed to a nonexposure job site or furloughed with pay 
until the blood-lead level has been reduced to no more 
than 40 |xg per 100 g of blood. 

5. The CAA of 1963, (PL 88-206), with its amendments 
of 1970 (PL 91-604) and 1977 (PL 95-294), and the EPA 
established NAAQS of 1978. This standard is to be fully 
implemented by January 1, 1988. During the interim, the 
existing operations can operate under temporary, renew- 
able variances, which are allowing for phased imple- 
mentation of the statutes. Although interim compliance 
can be met by periodic curtailment of production, final 
compliance cannot. 



11 



COSTS OF COMPLIANCE 

The capital and operating costs for environmental 
regulatory compliance are extremely variable from 
smelter to smelter. Variables such as smelter capacity, 
state regulations, plant technology, type of products, age, 
and degree of integration all affect the costs. In general, 
an industry average for present regulatory compliance 
costs is 2.3 cTlb of refined lead (table 5). Included in this 
cost are four general categories comprising employee 
health and safety, equipment operation and maintenance, 
supplementary labor, and hazardous materials handling 
and disposal. There appears to be a diseconomy of scale for 
the large smelters, but this is not the case. These costs are 
based on actual production at the time of the study. If the 
costs were based on rated smelter capacity, then the 
economy of scale would be consistent. 

TABLE 5.— Current regulatory compliance operating costs, 
average 1985 dollars 

Smelter Operating costs, 

capacity, mt/yr c/lb refined lead 

5,000 to 15,000 23 

15,000 to 40,000 2.2 

40,000 to 85,000 2.4 

Employee health and safety includes costs for clothes, 
shoes, respirators, safety glasses, hard hats, shower time, 
laundry, blood-lead monitoring, administration, and 
medical removal for high blood-lead levels. Equipment 
operation and maintenance includes costs associated with 
running and maintaining equipment installed specifically 
to meet environmental regulations. Equipment items 
include baghouses, negative pressure atmosphere sys- 
tems, floor scrubber machines, supplementary work- 
station ventilation, flue mufflers, scrubbers, and miscel- 
laneous equipment. Supplementary labor costs consist of 
people required to operate and maintain pollution control 
equipment as well as administrative requirements. 
Hazardous materials handling and disposal costs include 
acid neutralization, precipitation and transportation, 
water treatment, slag analysis and transportation, per- 
mits, and other disposal costs. Also included in this 
category are well and air monitoring and water effluent 
monitoring. 

Additional capital and operating costs for compliance 
with pending and proposed regulations are presented in 
table 6. The operating cost items represent only the costs 
associated with operations and maintenance. They do not 
include costs for interest on borrowed capital, deprecia- 
tion, taxes, and insurance. The actual costs to the 
companies would, in all likelihood, be higher than the 
presented values. The costs are based on actual costs for 
installed systems or for smelters that have already 
engineered systems and have obtained cost estimates from 
contractors for installing the systems. The costs, there- 
fore, represent actual site-specific industry costs for the 
various systems. Scaling these costs to a specific size 
smelter complex is not recommended because of the 
variability in size, design, and technology employed at 
each site. All of these costs do not necessarily apply to 
each smelter, because each smelter is in various stages of 
environmental compliance. 

The bureau's estimate for the average pending 
regulatory compliance operating cost is 3.5 eYlb of refined 
lead. This estimate is based on the present NAAQS 
standard of 1.5 |xg/m 3 ambient lead plus an estimated 
average for additional standards. If the standard is 



TABLE 6. — Pending and proposed regulatory compliance cost 
estimates for secondary lead smelters' 



Regulation 



Cost items 
or standards 



Operating cost, Capital Smelter capa- 
e/lb refined lead cost, ICPS city, 2 10 3 mt/yr 



CERCLA' 31 


Liability insurance 


w 


NAp 


NAp 




Estimated proposed tax on lead . 


^l 


NAp 


NAp 


CWA 


. 80 ppm Pb in water 


0.19-0.75 


$175-760 


13-41 


MRP 161 .. 


Removal from lead exposure at 
50 M-g per 1 00 g blood and 
return at 40n.g per 100 g blood 


(?) 


NAp 


NAp 


PEL' 81 


(PEL): 50 M-g/m 3 

Current: 1.5 M-g/m 3 Pb 


0.64 


1,085 


18 


NAAQS .. 


1.20 


9 5,750 


36 




Proposed: 1 .0 p.g/m 3 Pb 


0.72 


1,500 


12.5 




Proposed: 0.5 ng/m 3 Pb 


1.13 


3,050 


12.5 




Annual mean of 80 ng/m 3 SO? 
and 24-h mean of 365 ng/m* . 


0.21 


500-1 ,000 


22.5-66 










RCRA 


Hazardous waste handling, 
transportation, and disposal 


,0 0.34-1.6' 


113-1,000 


4.5-87 



NAp Not applicable. 

' All costs are not necesssarily applicable to every smelter because each 
may already be in compliance with one or several of the regulations. 

2 Used as basis for estimating costs. 

3 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability 
Act (Superfund). 

' Undetermined cost. Industry sources indicate that this type of insurance 
is not available and if it were made available, they could not afford the 
insurance premiums. 

5 Based on current tax rate for lead oxide. 

6 Medical Removal Program. 

7 Not determined because of too many variables, such as individual's 
ability to metabolize lead. Can be a significant cost item at some smelters. 

9 MRP and PEL are regulations promulgated by OSHA. 

9 Cost based on information developed from TRC report (11). Proposed 
standards are cumulative to the current standard. 

10 Costs based on smelter capacities from 6,500 mt/yr to 87,000 mt/yr. 
" Costs are extremely variable because of different requirements under 

the State Implementation Plans (SIP). Costs based on smelter capacities 
from 4,500 to 60,000 mt/yr. 



amended to 1.0 (xg/m 3 ambient lead, then the average 
industry compliance cost is estimated to be an additional 
0.5 c71b of refined lead. If the NAAQS standard is amended 
to 0.5 |xg/m 3 ambient lead, then the average industry 
compliance cost is estimated to be an additional 1.3 cYlb of 
refined lead. These cost estimates are considered to have 
an accuracy of ±25 pet (fig. 7). 



KEY 

Proposed 

Pending 

Present 

Direct operating costs 



Environmental 
compliance costs 



1985 a v price 
per pound 
refined lead 




5-15 15-40 40-85 

SMELTER CAPACITY, 10 3 mt/yr refined lead 

Figure 7.— Operating cost estimates for present, pending, 
and proposed environmental regulatory compliance. 



12 



The capital costs necessary to comply with these 
environmental regulations are presented in figure 8. The 
costs are grouped by smelter size and include estimates at 
the proposed NAAQS levels of 1.0 |xg/m 3 and 0.5 |xg/m\ 
because meeting this standard is the most significant cost 
item. Although the costs account for all of the environ- 
mental regulations, the total cost is not necessarily 
applicable to every smelter because of individual degree of 
environmental compliance. The capital cost estimates are 
considered to have a ±25 pet accuracy. 



16 

15 

~ 14 

u> 13 

oo 
S> 12 



(O 

o 



Q. 
< 
O 



11 
10 
9 
8 
7 
6 
5 
4 
3 
2 
1 



KEY 
Proposed costs 
Pending costs 




5-15 15-40 40-85 

SMELTER CAPACITY, 10 3 mt/yr refined lead 

Figure 8. — Capital cost estimates for pending and proposed 
environmental regulatory compliance. 

COMPLIANCE CAPABILITY 

The ability of the secondary lead industry to comply 
with the environmental regulations and remain profitable 
is questionable. On a direct cost per pound of lead basis, 
the industry would be losing money. The vertically 



integrated smelters, especially those that make high 
value-added specialty products, may be able to absorb the 
additional compliance costs, but profit margins will be 
severely reduced. 

•In addition, if current economic conditions continue 
and proposed environmental regulations become effective, 
many smelters will be forced to shut down. This will occur 
because some companies cannot afford the capital costs for 
compliance and also because many smelters' "book values" 
would be less than the capital expenditures. Companies 
would therefore consider alternative investments rather 
than risk capital expenditures into a business that offered 
a poor rate of return. Loss of production capacity is 
speculative, but could be as high as 350,000 mt/yr. This 
represents approximately 40 pet of the current industry 
production capacity. In general, the ability of the industry 
to survive is a function of size, degree of integration, 
efficiency, and ability to market products with value- 
added. 

The cost of regulatory compliance and the resultant 
effects on the industry could create this particular 
long-term chain of events: The smelter closures will lower 
demand for battery scrap, which will create an oversupply 
of scrap. With low demand and large supply, the price for 
scrap will decrease. This will dampen the incentive to 
recycle because of reduced profit margins. In some areas of 
the country, the price for scrap is already approaching the 
break-even cost for recycling. Continued downward price 
pressure will begin breaking down the recycling industry, 
especially the independents, which account for approx- 
imately 50 pet of the industry. The net effect is a loss of 
battery scrap supply because of a lack of recycling. The 
effect of a breakdown of the recycling industry will 
probably result in a serious environmental problem (12). 
Batteries will probably be dumped in inadequate land 
fills, along back roads, and in ditches. Because of the 
hazardous nature of batteries, the effect on the environ- 
ment would be the introduction of lead and sulfuric acid 
into the soil and possibly the water table, and the 
introduction of rubber and plastic into the soil. 

The primary lead industry should also be considered, 
assuming that the environmental regulations apply 
equally to the primaries. The primaries will be faced with 
significantly higher compliance costs (13), which may 
result in loss of production capacity through plant 
closures. If this occurs, production from the secondary lead 
industry may increase although fewer secondary smelters 
will be operating. 



CONCLUSIONS 



The continued depressed price of lead and the 
additional costs for environmental regulatory compliance 
have severely impacted the secondary lead industry. Since 
1980, plant closures have accounted for approximately 
200,000 mt of lost production capacity and 200,000 mt of 
temporary shutdown capacity. Current potential domestic 
capacity is 900,000 mt/yr of refined lead. More plant 
closures can be expected if stricter environmental regula- 
tions become effective. Resultant loss of capacity could be 
as high as 350,000 mt/yr or 40 pet of remaining domestic 
production capacity. 

Based on 1985 operating parameters and average 
1985 dollars, the average operating costs varied from 16.8 
to 19.6 c/lb of refined lead. The 1985 average sale price per 



pound of refined lead was approximately 19.2 c71b. 
Industry profitability for 1985 was very low and for many 
companies, it was close to break-even. Profit was mostly 
achieved by vertically integrated companies capable of 
producing value-added products. 

Present regulatory compliance costs, as an industry 
average, are 2.3 c71b of refined lead. Pending environmen- 
tal regulations could cost the industry an additional 3.5 
<2/lb of refined lead. It is estimated that proposed 
environmental regulations, assuming the NAAQS of 0.5 
(xg/m 3 , would cost an additional 1.3 eYlb of refined lead. 
This cost is in addition to the cost for pending regulatory 
compliance. These costs do not include discounted cash 
flow rate of return (DCFROR) analysis. 



13 



Capital costs necessary to comply with environmental 
regulations are estimated to be approximately $1.8 
million for smelters with capacities between 5,000 and 
15,000 mt/yr, $7.6 million for smelters between 15,000 
and 40,000 mt/yr, and $10.4 million for smelters between 
40,000 and 85,000 mt/yr. Proposed regulations could add 
an additional $1.9 million for smelters with capacities 
between 5,000 to 15,000 mt/yr, $3.6 million for smelters 
between 15,000 to 40,000 mt/yr, and $4.9 million for 
smelters between 40,000 and 85,000 mt/yr. 

These cost estimates indicate that pending and 
proposed environmental legislation could add significant- 



ly to capital and operating costs of the secondary lead 
industry, thereby reducing its capacity to recycle lead as 
marginal plants shut down. Ramifications could impact 
the recycling industry. The net result could be less scrap 
lead recycling, which could result in hazardous wastes, 
primarily batteries, being introduced into the environ- 
ment. If this legislation significantly affects the primary 
lead industry, the result may be a loss of both primary and 
secondary production capacity, however, the remaining 
smelters' actual production would increase. 



REFERENCES 



1. Charles River Associates Inc. (Cambridge, MA). Economic 
Impact of the Proposed EPA National Ambient Air Quality 
Standard for Lead: Background Support Document. Mar. 1978, 
127 pp. 

2. Economic and Environmental Analysis of the 

Current OSHA Lead Standard. CRA Project 536.60, 1982, 153 pp. 

3. CRU Consultants, Inc. (New York). The Costs of Producing 
Primary and Secondary Lead. Implications for Prices, Competi- 
tiveness, Environmental Standards, and New Technology. Com- 
modities Res. Unit LTD, New York, 1984, 340 pp. 

4. Putnam, Hayes and Bartlett, Inc. The Impacts of Lead 
Industry Economics on Battery Recycling. Prepared for Office of 
Policy Analysis, EPA. June 13, 1986, 32 pp. 

5. Woodbury, W. D. Lead. Ch. in BuMines Minerals Yearbook 
1984, v. 1, pp. 563-594. 

6. U.S. Bureau of Mines. Minerals Yearbooks 1970, 1975, 
1980-1985. Chapter on Lead. 

7. American Metal Market. Export Mart Still Strong. V. 94, 
No. 49, Mar. 12. 1986, p. 13A. 

8. Zelms, J. L. Lead: Hope For Modest Recovery. Eng. and Min. 
J., v. 187, No. 3, 1986, pp. 32-34. 

9. Murph, D. B., and J. L. Pinkston. Current Blast Furnace 



Practice at Murph Metals' Southern Lead Company Smelter. 
Metall. Soc. AIME paper A70-41, 1970, 13 pp. 

10. Hudson, E. K. (Lake Eng. and Dev., Inc., Atlanta, GA). 
Personal correspondence, 1986; available upon request from M. 
R. Daley, BuMines, Denver, CO. 

11. Hoffnagle, G. F., and W. A. Klinger. Exposure to Airborne 
Lead From Stationary Sources: An Evaluation of Proposed 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead. (Lead Ind. 
Assoc, project 3220-J51, TRC Environ. Consultants, Inc., East 
Hartford, CT,). Mar. 1986, 48 pp. 

12. Palmer, J. G., and M. L. Sappington. An Impending Crisis? 
What Would be the Impact on the Nation's Environment if 70 
Million Spent Lead Acid Batteries Each Year Were Not Recycled? 
April 1986, 24 pp.; available from J. G. Palmer, GNB 
Incorporated, St. Paul, MN, or M. L. Sappington, Lake 
Engineering and Development, Inc., Atlanta, GA. 

13. Smith, R. D., O. A. Kiehn, D. R. Wilburn, and R. C. 
Bowyer. Lead Reduction in Ambient Air: Technical Feasibility 
and Cost Analysis at Domestic Primary Lead Smelters and 
Refineries. BuMines OFR 67-86, 1986, 52 pp.; NTIS PB 
86-216447. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY 



Anderson, C. W., P. Behum, and F. Miller. Environmental and 
Occupational Health Regulations in the U.S. Lead Industry. 
BuMines OFR 3-86, 1986, 76 pp.; NTIS PB 86-155686. 

Everest Consulting Associates, Inc. (Princeton Jet., NJ), and 
CRU Consultants, Inc. (New York). The International Competi- 
tiveness of the U.S. Non-Ferrous Smelting Industry and the 
Clean Air Act. Ch. 4, 6, Apr. 1982. 

Gill, C. B. Nonferrous Extractive Metallurgy. Wiley, 1980, 346 
pp. 

Kilgore, C. C, S. J. Arbelbide, and A. A. Soja. Lead and Zinc 
Availability — Domestic. A Minerals Availability Program 
Appraisal. BuMines IC 8962, 1983, 30 pp. 

Kohn, A. F., Jr. The Recovery of Soft and Antimonial Lead From 
Secondary Sources. Pres. at 1963 AIME Annu. Meet., Dallas, TX, 
Feb. 24-28, 1963, Metall. Soc. AIME preprint #47-M, 1963, 12 pp. 



Peterson, G. R., K. E. Porter and A. A. Soja. Primary Lead and 
Zinc Availability — Market Economy Countries. A Minerals 
Availability Program Appraisal. BuMines IC 9026, 1985, 44 pp. 

Raymond Kaiser Engineers. Capital and Operating Cost Esti- 
mating System Handbook for Lead Smelting and Refining 
Facilities (contract JO245003). BuMines OFR 81-86, 1986, 282 
pp.; NTIS PB 86-246592. 

Sealey, C.J. Secondary Lead Smelter and Refinery. Tolltreck 
Limited, Droitwich, Worcestershire, England, Feb. 10, 1981, 15 
pp. 

Tolltreck International Limited (Englewood, CO). General 
information brochures, 1985, 70 pp. 



14 



APPENDIX A.— EXAMPLE OF CAPITAL AND OPERATING COST ESTIMATES FOR 
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY COMPLIANCE 



An example of costing methodology has been included 
for a fictitious smelter with a 40,000 mt/yr refined lead 
capacity. It is assumed that this smelter approximates the 
industry's average level of compliance (fig. A-l). There- 
fore, the costs presented for each regulation reflect the 
additional costs necessary for compliance. Costs associ- 



9. Smelter is partially 
enclosed 

10. Existing process 
emissions control 
includes one baghouse: 

11. Small oxide plant 



120,000 ftVrnin capacity 



Materials 
supply and 
maintenance 



Administration 

Change room 

Lunch room 

Security 



Battery » | — | r 

breaker 




L 



XJt 



f t t 

Raw material storage area- 



Blast furnace 
charge bin 



Blast lurnace 

Reverberatory 
furnace 



Control 
room 



Fan 
room 



Exhaust stack- 



Process dust 
collectors 



-Afterbum and 
cooling towers 



Finished 

lead 

storage 



-j 



I Refining kettlea > 

ooo 

_j 



I Casting line area 



Oxide plan t 



Figure A-1. — Original smelter facilities. 

ated with these regulations should be interpreted with 
caution and with a complete understanding of the level of 
compliance for the example smelter. The components 
comprising the costs for each regulation are presented in 
this appendix. Contingencies for each regulation vary 
according to degree of confidence. These costs do not 
necessarily equal or approximate the costs presented in 
table 6 of the main text. The costs for each smelter are 
extremely variable because of smelter layout, existing 
technology incorporated at the smelter, and degree of 
environmental compliance. Smelter statistics are pre- 
sented below in order to better understand cost estimates 
for this example: 

1. Production capacity: 

2. Primary feed material: 

3. Operating parameters: 

4. Average hourly wage: 

5. Payroll overhead: 

6. Limestone: 

7. Electricity: 

8. Current acid 
neutralization process 
is not BAT 



40,000 mt/yr refined lead 

85 pet batteries 

3 spd, 290 d/yr 

$9.30/h 

35 pet 

$30/mt delivered 

$0.05/kW-h 



CWA 

The costs associated with the CWA are based on the 
use of lime and settle technology. This technology 
incorporates acid neutralization, heavy metal precipita- 
tion and sedimentation, and multiple stage pH control. All 
battery acid, process water, and water introduced onto the 
property requires treatment by lime and settle technolo- 
gy. For this example, it was assumed that lime and settle 
technology was not being used. The capital costs therefore 
include an acid neutralization and water treatment plant 
with a 3-stage settling pond system (fig. A-2). The cost 
items are presented in table A-l. 



Settling ponds- 



Acid 
neutralization 
and water 
r^vtreatment 

•a 



Materials 
supply and 
maintenance 




Administration 

Change room 

Lunch room 

Security 



Battery » | 1 . 

breaker 



L 



XJt 



t f 

Raw material storage 



Blast lurnace 
charge bin 

LZJ 



Blast furnace 



Reverberatory 
furnace — 



t J 
area— 1 

D 



Control 
room 



Fan 
room 



Exhaust stack - 



Process dust 
collectors 



- Afterbum and 
cooling towers 



Finished 

lead 
storage 



m A 



I Refining kettlea — > 

OOO 
lo 



I Casting line area 

I 



Oxide plan t 



Figure A-2.— Additional smelter facilities for CWA. 

The operating costs associated with the CWA include 
utilities, supplies, labor, payroll overhead, and general 
office charges. Lime is the primary supply used for 
neutralization, but coagulants and flocculants may also be 
added to enhance settling properties. Coagulants and 
flocculants were not added to this cost model because the 
parameters requiring these reagents are not identified for 
this example. Much of the labor associated with operating 
this treatment plant is not required on a full-time basis. It 



15 



TABLE A-1. — CWA capital cost estimate 



Cost item 



Unit cost plus 
installation, $ 



Number Total cost, 1 $ 



Acid sump pump 1 5,000 

Acid transfer pump 8,000 

Lime storage bin 6,000 

Lime hopper & transfer system 11 0,000 

Neutralization tanks 1 2,000 

Clarifier 46,000 

Thickener 24,000 

pH control tanks 4,500 

PH monitor system 14,000 

ilter system 135,000 

Grounds sump pumps 9,000 

Grounds piping and electrical 2 1 8.00 

Pond recycle sump pumps 11 ,000 

Residue ponds 60,000 

Recycle pond 60,000 

Subtotal 

Contingency @ 15 pet 

Total installed cost 



3 
890 
3 
2 
1 



15,000 
8,000 
6,000 

110,000 
24,000 
46,000 
24,000 
9,000 
14,000 

135,000 
27,000 
16,000 
33,000 

120,000 
60,000 



647,000 
97,000 

744,000 



1 Values rounded to the nearest $100. 

2 Per foot. 

has therefore been partitioned as a percentage of time 
required by labor category and average wage or salary 
category. Administration is considered to be one full-time 
"environmental specialist" to deal with all regulations 
affecting this smelter. The salary has been equally 
partitioned to each regulation. General office charges for 
all regulations are considered to include phones, utilities, 
office supplies, vehicles, public relations, and miscel- 
laneous expenses. These costs are presented in table A-2. 



~n 1 - 

Settling ponds 



Acid 

neutralization 

and water 

O treatment 
AD 
O 5 



Materiala 
aupply and 
maintenance 



Administration 

Change room 

Lunch room 

Security 




TABLE A-2. — CWA annual operating cost estimate, dollars 

Cost item Total cost 1 

Utilities and supplies: 

Lime 100,800 

Electricity (200 hp @ 5c/kWh) 13,800 

Repair parts e 6,600 

Labor: 

General labor (2.5 people @ 2 $1 5,000) 37,500 

Maintenance labor (0.5 person @ 2 $1 8,000) 9,000 

Supervision (0.3 person @ 2 $24,000) 7,200 

Laboratory-labor (0.3 person <& 2 $14,000/yr/person) . . . 4,200 

Laboratory-skilled (2 people @ .3 @ 2 $24,000) 14,400 

Administration (0.25 person @ 2 $34,000) 8,500 

Payroll overhead (35 pet of all listed personnel) 28,300 

General office charges "2,000 

Subtotal 232,300 

Contingency (10 pet) 23,200 

Total annual cost 255,500 

NOTE. — Cost per pound refined lead based on a production rate of 40,000 
mt/yr refined lead: 0.29 <?'lb. 

1 Values rounded to tha nearest $100. 

2 Annual cost per person. 
8 Estimated. 

PEL 



Cost estimates for PEL are based on a 50 (xg/m 3 
standard and include engineering and personal hygiene 
controls. It is assumed that a combination of these controls 
will limit workers exposure to the PEL standard. Some 
controls can also be applied to NAAQS because they serve 
the same purpose. For this study, the cost items were 
distributed to the particular regulation for which they 
were most applicable. 

The capital costs associated with PEL include 
wet-vacuum floor sweepers to control resuspension of lead, 
a ventilation dust collector with 10,000 ftVmin capacity, 
six down-cast ventilation stations, and all ductwork for 
both systems. The example's ductwork requirements, hood 
locations, and smelter layout are shown in figures A-3 and 
A-4. A summary of the capital costs are presented in table 
A-3. 



Figure A-3. — Additional process emissions control equip- 
ment and ductwork for PEL. 



1 1 

Settling ponda 

1 1 




Administration 


Acid 

neutralization 

and water 




Change room 
Lunch room 


/-^treatment 

0/\Q 

o s 


Materiala 
aupply and 
maintenance 1 


Security 






Battery z 
breaker 


Jar" 





JLi 



i t 

I — Raw mat 



i 



area— > 



Control 
room 



Blast furnec 
charge bin 

/ 



LG 




erlal storage area 

~7~ 



Blast lurnace 



V- 



Finished | 
lead 
storage I 




Fan 
room 



L> 



Exhaust stack - 



Process dust 
collectors 



ReverberatoryC 
furnace C 

Refining kettles — 



-Afterburn and 
cooling towers 




i Caating line area 



q Oxide plan t 

o 



_L 



Oxide 
atorage 



Figure A-4.— Additional downcast ventilation and ductwork 
for PEL. 



16 



TABLE A-3.— OSHA's PEL capital cost estimate 1 , dollars 

^t item £g_ 

Boor sweepers (2 @ $27,000 each) 54,000 

Ventilation dust collector (450 hp fan; 460 V, 495 A, 

100,000 f^/min) 307,000 

Ductwork (14 ga, gasket and flange connection, 1 ,020 

lineal ft @ $300/lineal ft) 306,000 

Downcast ventilation (fan, 6 workstations, 480 lineal ft 

@ $70/lineal ft) 33,600 

Subtotal 700,600 

Contingency (15 pet) 105,100 

Total capital cost 805,700 

1 Smelter assumed to be in partial compliance with PEL. Therefore, costs 
do not represent the total cost for compliance. 

2 Values rounded to the nearest $100. Total cost includes purchase, 
freight, and installation where applicable. 

The operating costs associated with PEL are pre- 
sented in table A-4. Safety equipment items include hard 
hats, respirators, earplugs, gloves, and uniforms. Laundry 
service includes daily washing of uniforms. The other cost 
items are described in the table. 

TABLE A-4. — OSHA's annual operating cost estimate 1 

rv«»item Annual cost Number Total 
v ' OSITOm per employee, $ of people cost 2 , $ 

Safety equipment 240 78 18,700 

Laundry service 210 78 16,400 

Medical examinations 240 92 22,100 

Personal hygiene 3 440 78 34,300 

Floor sweeping NAp 4 1 .3 32,800 

Maintenance NAp *2A 105,000 

Utilities 6 NAp NAp 62,000 

Baghouse liners 7 NAp NAp 19,300 

Administration 45,900 0.25 1 1 ,500 

General office (estimated) . . 1,500 

Subtotal 323,600 

Contingency (10 pet) 32,400 

Total cost "356,000 

NAp Not applicable. 

1 Costs based on a 92-employee labor force. 

2 Values rounded to the nearest $100. 

3 Costs include overtime pay for shower time @ 7.5 min/d @ an average wage 
of $9.30/h @ time and one-half pay. 

4 Costs include 3 h/shift, 3 spd, 290 d/yr @ $9.30/h plus payroll overhead @ 35 
pet. 

5 Costs include labor, maintenance supplies, administrative, and indirect 
costs. 

8 Cost for electricity based on 178.2 kWh draw @ 24 h/d, 290 d/yr, and 
5c/kWh. 

7 Replacement of baghouse liners is $38,600. The liners are replaced 
every other year so one-half of the cost ($19,300) is charged on an annual 
basis. 

8 Cost per pound refined lead based on a production rate of 40,000 mt/yr 
refined lead: 0.40e/lb. 



1 r- 

Settling ponds 
I I 




Administration 


Acid 

neutralization 

and water 






Change room 
Lunch room 


•—■■.treatment 

0/\D 
O I 


Materials 
supply and 
maintenance 




Security 








Battery _ 
breaker " 


-igr 








Exhaust stack- 



Process dust 
collectors 



Afterburn and 
cooling towers 



Oxide pian t 



Oxide 

storage 



Figure A-5. — Original smelter process emissions control 
equipment, ductwork, and building enclosure. 



1 1 

Settling ponda 
1 1 




Administration 


Acid 

neutralization 

and water 






Change room 
Lunch room 


^-Ntreatment 

0/\D 

o § 


Materials 
aupply and 
maintenance 




Security 








Battery _ 
breaker ~ 


Jczir^ 







NAAQS 

In estimating the costs associated with the NAAQS, it 
is assumed that the smelter can achieve the 1.5 n,g/m 3 Pb 
standard, the annual mean of 80 (ig/m 3 S0 2 , and the 24-h 
mean of 365 u-g/m 3 S0 2 . The proposed process controls are 
considered BAT, but in reality, it is not known whether 
these process controls can meet the standards. 

The capital costs include smelter enclosure, installa- 
tion of an additional baghouse, ductwork, air monitoring 
systems for lead and S0 2 , installation of an S0 2 gas 
scrubber, enclosure and surfacing of the entire yard area 
including sump stations for water runoff collection, a 
wheel washing station at the primary materials handling 
access, and an agglomerating system at the process dust 
collectors. Figures A-5 to A-7 show the smelter layout 
with the specific costing items highlighted. The most 
important items assumed to be already installed for this 
example smelter are the partial plant enclosure and the 



^Additional 

building 



enclosure 




Scale, ft 



Figure A-6— Additional building enclosures for NAAQS. 



17 



J 1 - 

Settling ponds 
_J L_ 



Acid 

neutralization 

and water 

Otreatmant 
/\D 

o 

o 



O 



Materials 
aupply and 

maintenance 



Administration 
Chang* room 
Lunch room 

Security 




Load material 
atorag* 




Figure A-7 — Additional process 
merit and ductwork for NAAQS. 



emissions control equip- 



process emissions controls at the blast furnace, reverbera- 
tory furnace, refining kettles, and oxide kettles (fig. A-5). 
Also, this smelter has an afterburner and cooling towers, 
which are probably not standard level of compliance items 
for the lead industry. The capital costs are presented in 
table A-5. 

The operating costs associated with the NAAQS are 
presented in table A-6 and are based on the operation and 
maintenance of the previously mentioned process controls. 



TABLE A-5.— NAAQS capital cost estimate for the current 
regulation of 1.5u.g/m 31 

Cost item Total cost 2 , $ 

Plant enclosure: 

Strip doors (5 doors; 1,216 ft 2 @ $1 5.50/ft 2 ) 18,800 

Plant enclosure (25,500 ft 2 @ $8.30/ft 2 ) 21 1 ,700 

Foundation (350 lineal ft @ $26.00/lineal ft) 9,100 

Air monitoring: 

Lead monitor (photometer system) 51 ,000 

S0 2 monitor (fluorescent system) 32,000 

S0 2 gas scrubber 53,300 

Yard paving (2 in asphalt, 4 in aggregate, 96,000 ft 2 

@ $0.82/ft 2 , plus mobilization) 79,800 

Curb (6 in by 9 in with 8 in subgrade, 2,1 00 lineal ft 

@ $7.25/lineal ft) 15,200 

Baghouse (100,000 frVmin system; 450 hp fan, 460 V, 

495 A) 307,000 

Ductwork (14 ga, gasket and flange connection, 520 lineal ft 

@ $300/lineal ft) 156,000 

Electrical system airflow monitor, fan restart system 50,000 

Aqglomerator system 34,000 

Wheel washing station 16,000 

Subtotal 1 ,033,900 

Contingency (1 5 pet) 155,100 

Total cost 1,189,000 

1 Smelter assumed to be in partial compliance with NAAQS. Therefore, 
costs do not represent the total cost for compliance. 

2 Values rounded to the nearest $1 00. Total cost includes purchase, ^ 
freight, and installation where applicable. 2o O c? 



TABLE A-6. — NAAQS annual operating cost estimate for the 
current regulation of 1.5u.g/m 3 

Cost item Total cost 1 , $ 

Materials and utilities: 

Electricity 86,800 

General supplies (10 pet of electricity) 8,700 

Maintenance materials (60 pet of labor and supervision) . . . 54,800 

Baghouse liners 38,500 

Labor: 

General labor (2 people @ 2 $15,000) 30,000 

Maintenance labor (1 .5 people @ 2 $1 8,000) 27,000 

Supervision (.4 person @ 2 $14,000) 9,600 

Laboratory-labor (.4 person @ 2 $14,000) 5,600 

Laboratory-skilled (2 people @ .4"@ 2 $24,000) 19,200 

Administration (.25 person @ 2 $34,000) 8,500 

Payroll overhead (35 pet of above personnel) 35,000 

General office (estimated) 3,500 

Subtotal 327,200 

Contingency (20 pet) 65,400 

Total cost 392,600 

Cost per lb refined lead based on a production rate of 

40,000 mt/yr refined lead: 0,45c/lb. 

1 Values rounded to the nearest $100. 

2 Annual cost per person. 

RCRA 

Capital costs associated with RCRA include the "part 
B" permit, the ground water monitoring system, and the 
material testing laboratory and equipment. For this 
example, the well monitoring system includes eight wells 
(each 80-ft deep), well casing, pumps, pipe, electrical 
hardware, caps, and well-site paving. Material testing 
equipment includes an atomic-absorption spectrophoto- 
meter, multiple and single element tubes, and miscel- 
laneous equipment for wet- and dry-test methods. The 
part B permit costs between $30,000 and $50,000 and 
generally varies because of smelter size. For this example, 
the cost is assumed to be $42,000. Also included is the 
battery breaker enclosure. The ventilation and ductwork 
has been charged to the PEL regulation (fig. A-8). The 
capital costs for RCRA are presented in table A-7. 



Settling ponds 
_! L_ 



Acid 

neutralization 
and water 
streatment 



Administration 
Chang* room 
Lunch room 

Security 




Figure A-8.— Additional building enclosures for RCRA. 



18 



TABLE A-7— RCRA capital cost estimate 

Cost item Total cost 1 , $ 

Well monitoring: 

Drilling (1 wells, 80 ft deep, $1 2/ft to drill and case) 9,600 

Pumps (10 @ $400 each) 4,000 

Pipe and electrical (10 sites @ $450/site) 1,500 

Overhead electrical (10 sites @ $450/site) 4,500 

Cap and pave (10 sites @ $250/site) 2,500 

Installation (10 wells @ $250/well) 2,500 

Contingency (10 sites @ $150/site) 1,500 

Drill rig mobilization 600 

Subtotal 26,700 

Battery breaker enclosure: 

Foundation (432 ft @ $11/lineal ft) 4,800 

Siding and roofing (13,340 ft 2 @ $8.30/1f) 110,700 

Strip doors (4 doors; 928 ft 2 @ $15.50/f^) 14,400 

Contingency (15 pet of above items) 19,500 

Subtotal 149,400 

Miscellaneous costs: 

RCRA part B permit 42,000 

Atomic absorption spectrometer 55,000 

Support equipment, lab supplies 8,000 

General office (estimated) 1,500 

Subtotal 106,500 ~ 

Total capital cost 282,600 

1 Values rounded to the nearest $100. Total cost includes purchase, 
freight, and installation where applicable. 

The operating costs for RCRA compliance include 
well monitoring and testing, and material testing. The 
costs are composed of labor, equipment operation and 



TABLE A-8.— RCRA annual operating cost estimate 

Cost item Total cost 1 , $ 

Well monitoring: 

General labor (.3 person @ 2 $14,000) 4,200 

Laboratory-labor (.3 person @ 2 $1 4,000) 4,200 

Laboratory-skilled (2 people @ .3 @ 2 $24,000) 14,400 

Supervision (.3 person @ 2 $30,000) 9,000 

Payroll overhead (35 pet of above personnel) 1 1 ,100 

Materials and utilities (1 pet of labor & supervision) 3,200 

General office "2,000 

Subtotal 48,100 

Waste disposal: 

Contract haulage 173,000 

Disposal fees 108,500 

RCRA administration (.25 person @ 2 $34,000) 8,500 

Payroll overhead (35 pet of administration) 3,000 

Subtotal 293,000 

Contingency 3 (15 pet) 51 ,200 

Total cost 392,300 

Cost per lb refined lead based on a production rate of 

40,000 mt/yr refined lead: 0.44 e/lb. 

1 Values rounded to the nearest $100. 

2 Annual cost per person. 

3 For well monitoring and waste disposal. 
8 Estimated. 



maintenance, laboratory supplies, and supervision (table 
A-8). Waste disposal is based on a 100-mile one-way haul 
distance by contract carrier. The dump site is considered 
to be a class II or better hazardous waste disposal site. 



♦U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1987-190-U1U Region 3. 










■V 








iV-^, 






^ ^ 






* o. 



V *^ s * A <r^ *?.?* .g* *o • ' a 











^ -J 



*bv* 



■ "7..W/ v^v v^-y v»V v»\ 
^ / •£&-• % * -Mt \ S'£te-\ /*&% Am'\ / 










v-o^ 



oV 












*< ^o^ i 




.// %-^^v v^'y %^\^ \^-y %^ 













- ^0* i 





%^ .*^&: \/ -» %^ yMM» \/ # \^ : 

c°*.-^I->o ^'.C^,\. c°*.«^V*°o 4**^/** / 



- ^t. 6^ ° 



o V 



















J ^^- 



















• rf5^v^'. o 



^ 











^ ^ v v%>"i- ^ y^^&^% * v ^i'i-. %. 







V<S' 







.,.. ,G^ 

/ v*<^y °^"-"- 










*ffll//2 ^ a n 







•V °> c 
b \/ 




**o« 




■4* 



vv 








* «y 



• +*<* 







O *<tS* <G T ^ 



v t *LVL'* ^ a? »i*«- O 







^o* 








*bv' 



j°+ -m^; _*°^ v^jk; ^°- 








^<? 




ft A.V Va . ^|iS * «? V, o 

^* c^^n *^^^W* A V *^ : ^i|p^ n ^^ o^y^S" aVA 



.v % ~ * ° - ° v « 







tv 







'bV 




\^-?\/ V : ^'/ %*%?'<? %*^'*o° s 
> ♦ -!^af , y V • -ft - * <v* % -^^^ ^ \ ' -ft - * a* % ^?^ ^ ^> 








'bV v 




l \^ V '/ \'tt % \f 



c 1 '^ "MM' A^^ 






^0^ 








./\ 




- A V -^ 








V A* , 









&- -it 



-\6* *o --.ft.\ v ^ ^/^/ \.*'ft'\^ % 6 -! ^ , > ', *o 





NOV.-DEC. 1987 



•A ^ 



fcK 



o ^ 









LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



002 951 030 1 



HW B 






■ra 



